We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.

Episode 7: My DS Sounds Like Mr. Feeny

by Evan Burchfield - June 27, 2006, 10:27 pm PDT
Total comments: 19

This week's podcast features a frank discussion of RPGs, product placement in the cinema, and Chopin.

Download in AAC Format

Subscribe to AAC Feed

Download in MP3 Format

Subscribe to MP3 Feed

Subscribe via iTunes (Please rate and review, too!)

If I go down I'm taking you with me!

Nevermind all that hooplah about videocasts and real-time chat, we podcast the old-fashioned way: audio, a little technical wizardry, and a big hunk of stupidity. Stupidity, apparently, is in high supply around here. Judging by the downloads, it must also be in high demand (a frightening equation!).

It must be noted, yes it must, that if you are a user of iTunes and choose to listen to the AAC version of the cast, you will be treated, nay, gifted a cache of special features. Not only will you get to see very pretty pictures illustrating our verbosity, they will in all truth link you to new, unheard of places. If this doesn't sound like your thing, (to be honest, I hate it), then just use the MP3 version.

You can also listen to it on
Though nothing interesting has happened at all over the past week (my wife did have a baby girl, no one cares), we were able to scrounge up some interesting factoids, chief among them that Nintendo has sold out, and to British children's cinema no less. For a moment, we think and lean on Sonic's presence in our lives, followed by a lengthy listener mail segment, and a short, quiet meditation on Red Steel. At the end I see, all too clearly, that Mike is totally capable of making me look forward to absolutely nothing. I offer our Podcast as audio proof of his verbal torture.

If you have any questions, complaints, compliments, or criticisms please send them to our new podcast email address:

And if you want, you can let us know what you think in our talkback thread! Of course, the past few threads have been heinously rude, so I'd rather you just kept it to yourself.

Talkback

"You really have crushed my soul once again"

Golden

mantidorJune 28, 2006

I liked the mention of Super Paper Mario and the mention of Paper Mario as obviously superior than square's rpgs, overall good podcast, keep up the good work!

and sin and punshiment will be on the virtual console no matter what mike says! I don't care about mother so whatever :P

BloodworthDaniel Bloodworth, Staff AlumnusJune 28, 2006

New Super Mario Bros. too short? Are you kidding me? I still haven't finished it. I swear some of our staff are the most jaded on the Internet to not like NSMB.

Oblivion isn't Bioware dude. Bioware did Knights of the Old Republic, which was awesome and while it had branching paths it is not nearly as wide open.

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusJune 28, 2006

Thanks for noting that Blood. We were thinking of Bethesda. I think you should make a feature out of correcting our factual errors during the Podcast right here in the Talkback thread. After all, we get things wrong more than we get them right.

IceColdJune 28, 2006

Quote

New Super Mario Bros. too short? Are you kidding me? I still haven't finished it. I swear some of our staff are the most jaded on the Internet to not like NSMB.
Seriously.. that game is brilliant. It's only "short" if you rush through it without bothering to unlock everything. Just like the other 2D Mario games..

CalibanJune 28, 2006

Another boring podcast. Pardon my harshness.

BloodworthDaniel Bloodworth, Staff AlumnusJune 28, 2006

10.jpg

NSMB is a short game. It can be beaten in less than two hours the first time through for someone experienced in the series (which includes a LOT of people). But it has good replay value because of the two "secret" worlds and all the alternate exits. It's taking me a while to open up every single path on all eight maps. I probably won't bother getting all the coins since they'll be useless by then.

I don't think calling NSMB short is a sign that we're jaded. It's a sign that we are already quite skilled at the gameplay, which is virtually identical to past Super Mario games. The original SMB took me many hours to complete the first time, because I had to learn how to deal with the many challenges and learn how to use the controls and such. Super Mario 64 is a somewhat longer game by any definition, but it also took a long time to beat because it reset everyone's skill level and presented completely new kinds of challenges. NSMB just isn't like that; most everything is old hat. I think it's best suited for people who have never played a 2D platformer or haven't played one since the NES days. Expert gamers will still have a blast with it, but they're going to blow through it very quickly.

StrikerObiMike Sklens, Podcast EditorJune 29, 2006

NSMB feels geuninely shorter than Super Mario World to me. I think the levels are slightly shorter in general. It was a lot of fun but I don't think the challenge ramped up quickly enough or enough at all. I believe it was a concession made because they wanted to pull in more "people who used to play games but no longer do" as Iwata calls them.

PaleMike Gamin, Contributing EditorJune 29, 2006

I agree on the shortness of NSMB, at least if you are talking about just seeing the credits... For me that game really is a 7.5-8 range. It's a lot of fun, but isn't as great as everyone had hoped.

Also, I read Evan's response to Blood as "Thanks for nothing." It made me laugh. face-icon-small-smile.gif

ShyGuyJune 29, 2006

Blah, NSMB is one of the best games you've played all year and you know it.

I think yall have become too jaded to appreciate any new Mario platformer.

I expect the same complaints when Super Mario Galaxy is released. face-icon-small-wink.gif

I'll appreciate a new Mario platformer when Nintendo releases a new Mario platformer.

BOOM YEAH I SAID IT!

NSMB is totally fun, yo. Just not original or lengthy in any way.

ShyGuyJune 29, 2006

Quote

Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
I'll appreciate a new Mario platformer when Nintendo releases a new Mario platformer.



See Jonny, that's exactly my point. The gaming populace has so defined in their minds what a Mario platformer is, that there can never be a "new" Mario platformer.

The game either follows the rules of a Mario platformer and is said to be not original, or it's such a radical departure that it isn't considered a Mario platformer game.

to sum up: You are all teh Jaded!1!

RequiemJune 29, 2006

Seriously, I think you guys are too harsh.

Especially when you commented on how you didn't like Mario Kart: DD! because it was confusing or something like that. I bet you that if you hadn't played games almost every single day leading up to the moment where you played DD, you would think HIGHLY of it. Instead, you think the opposite.

I have friends who rarely play videogames, and when they do NCAA or Halo or some other game like that is usually what they play. When they played Mariokart: DD!, they loved it. They cracked up at it and sometimes during the races, things got really intense (the sign of a good game). They hadn't played that type of game since Mariokart 64.

You see, my point is that you guys can be too critical. You need to step back and use an outside perspective on things. But most importantly, you need to stop comparing games to other games. That instantly makes you jaded.

The Double Dash comments made no sense to me either. It's as good as any other MK game; they're all nearly the same thing anyway. DD does have a great co-op mode that is worth playing.

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusJune 29, 2006

Quote

Originally posted by: Requiem
Especially when you commented on how you didn't like Mario Kart: DD! because it was confusing or something like that. I bet you that if you hadn't played games almost every single day leading up to the moment where you played DD, you would think HIGHLY of it. Instead, you think the opposite.


Quote

Originally posted by: Requiem
But most importantly, you need to stop comparing games to other games. That instantly makes you jaded.


No man is an island, and no game (or any art) exists in a vacuum. Games, like film or literature, can and should be enjoyed by the uninitiated and inexperienced; in the same way a person may enjoy a wooden rollercoaster having never been on a rollercoaster before. However, once that person gets a taste of the steel coaster, the newer coasters that push physics and engineering, that offer more thrills, they have a better frame of reference before saying that the wooden one was "great." In a similar way, the non-gamer's opinion of certain (read: most) games has less value to me than a true gamer's.

I don't understand this argument, and I never have. Why is the opinion of the savage who has never played a game higher than that of the experienced, perhaps hardened, "gamer?" This argument supposes that we are tainted by playing games, and our opinions become less accurate as games tear us from reality. The naturalists among us believe their hobby is self-destructive, and they were never a better gamer than before they were born.

I don't feel qualified to comment on some games because I have not played the highlights of the genre. I have played several Mario Kart games, albeit out of order, and I feel Double Dash's unique style and co-op play are worthy, just not up to par with other offerings. Why would I trust the opinion of someone who has never played Mario Kart? When a child appreciates Thomas Kinkade, is he not wrong? Why were the boy bands popular amongst pre-teens? Education and context bring about a true opinion. I do not trust the savage or even my immediate reaction. Only over time and with great care can I form an opinion, consciously and with attention, not inactively; otherwise, it is as though my initial impression must be exalted over what is actually true.

If we didn't compare games to other games, then every game would be a masterpiece. There would be no criteria by which to judge. The unfortunate problem with today's world is that we have destroyed criteria and antithesis; as a result, we pretend that opinions need no justification.

ShyGuyJune 29, 2006

Food tastes better if you're hungry.

RequiemJune 30, 2006

ShyGuy, thank you.

KDR_11kJune 30, 2006

I don't understand this argument, and I never have. Why is the opinion of the savage who has never played a game higher than that of the experienced, perhaps hardened, "gamer?" This argument supposes that we are tainted by playing games, and our opinions become less accurate as games tear us from reality. The naturalists among us believe their hobby is self-destructive, and they were never a better gamer than before they were born.

As you play more games you build up preconceptions of what you want a game to be. You learn game conventions, you learn to "read" a game. When I see a room or talk with an NPC I gain a much different understanding of what's going on than what a non-gamer would get. Example: Some CSI game. A roulette puzzle. My mother approaches it and pushes a few buttons, can't solve it but tries again and again, finally giving up in frustration. I take a look, notice that it displays playing cards (conclude that four numbers are necessary), notice that she has two clues in her inventory, gotten from two different NPCs (two more necessary, both obtained from the remaining two NPCs) and tell her that she can't solve that yet.

Share + Bookmark





Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement